WORKING WITH ETHICS AND DIVERSITY IN PROFESSIONAL PRACTISE-FGM
Working with Ethics and Diversity in Professional Practise.
Introduction
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is the partial or total removal of external female genitalia for non-medical purposes. This practice, which has no health benefit whatsoever, is carried out on young girls between infancy and the age of 15 years and practiced mostly in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. FGM can cause bleeding and urinating problems, infections, and complications during childbirth. This paper will discuss whether Female Genital Mutilation is an element of identity or an illegal act, ethical theories regarding this practice, and laws and legislation concerning FGM.
An Element of Identity or An Immoral, Illegal Act
At least 200 million girls and women across the globe have undergone some form of FGM. In African countries such as Kenya, the prevalence rate is 21%. The practice is always carried out by traditional circumcisers, and in other circumstances; health care providers perform the procedure due to the belief that it is safer. The reasons for performing FGM vary from one community or religion to another. In many African societies that practice the act, it includes a mixture of sociocultural factors within families and communities. For example, in countries where FGM is a social convention, girls and women fear being rejected by the community, and therefore, they undergo the practice to be socially accepted. In other communities, FGM is considered as a part of raising a girl child and a way of preparing her for marriage. Thompson (2016) argues that the beliefs prompt the practice about what is considered acceptable sexual behavior. Its purpose is to ensure premarital virginity and marital fidelity. Kenyan communities that practice this act believe that FGM reduces a woman’s libido, and therefore, this helps resist extramarital sexual acts. These communities use the argument that FGM is a cultural tradition to continue its practice.
However, the WHO insists that FGM harms girls and women. Since it involves the removal of a normal and healthy female genital tissue, it interferes with the girls’ and women’s bodies’ natural functions. The practice is associated with all forms of risks, including severe pain and excessive bleeding, infections, e.g., tetanus, wound healing problems, genital tissue swelling, and, in some cases, death. Other long-term challenges include urinary problems like painful urination or urinary tract infections. Vaginal problems like discharge, itching, and bacterial infections may occur. There is also a possibility of developing menstrual issues, difficulty in passing menstrual blood. Others may experience pain during intercourse and decreased satisfaction. Moreover, FGM increases the risk of childbirth complications, leading to the deaths of a newborn. Lastly, it can cause later surgeries like cutting the sealed virginal opening to allow for sexual intercourse and psychological problems like anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and depression (Banks 2012).
Ethical theories
In traditional patriarchal societies, the man’s role is to provide and protect his family. The woman’s position has always been childbearing, sex, and performing household activities. FGM is, therefore, a manifestation of unequal relations between men and women whose roots have been entrenched on social and economic conventions. Societies and communities that are inclined towards patriarchy have a considerable lack of women’s rights. Africa and parts of the Middle East have the highest instances of FGM, with Egypt, Guinea, and Djibouti recording over 90% of the FGM rate.
According to Parrott (2014), FGM arises from a patriarchal power structure that validates the need to control girls and women. It majorly stems from a stereotypical perception that girls and women are the guardians of sexual morality. This practice curtails women’s sexual expression to ensure their purity. In many communities, FGM practice is beneficial for the girl and the community.
Deontology, Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics
Deontological theories base morality on specific duties and obligations. The theory claims that certain actions are right or wrong, regardless of the consequences of these actions. Therefore, a person must act per a moral norm, irrespective of the effects of acting otherwise. The deontological view holds that actions cannot be justified by their consequences, in more precise terms, the ends do not warrant the means. Therefore, FGM practitioners use the theory to perform the acts without due regard to the underlying consequences. For the communities that practice FGM, death as a result of the practice is regarded as the will of God. It is not tied to the repugnant practice that they regard as morally right and should be passed from generation to another.
In contrast, this is viewed as a right, whereas it’s illegal in most countries. Girls, in some instances, are forced into the practice. The illegality renders the use of the theory as wrong ab initio.
Utilitarianism.
On the other hand, utilitarianism states that actions are morally right if they maximize the good and minimize the bad. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart believed that actions are morally right if they maximize pleasure and minimize suffering. Greatest happiness to the enormous majority is the principle in theory. To communities that accept FGM view it as acceptable by the majority of the members of the society. The acceptability of FGM is diminishing in most cultures, and this explains the reduced percentage of prevalence in countries such as Kenya compared to one decade ago. The opposing view is that the practice is inhumane and degrading treatment and doesn’t bring the greatest happiness to society’s most significant members.
The virtue of Ethics.
Virtue ethics is rooted in the work of Aristotle and claims that ethics is about agents and not actions or consequences. This theory is tied to purpose. For instance, FGM is practised in different societies for different purposes, as supra discussed. The differing view is that there are no benefits of FGM and that it brings complications to the persons it’s performed.
Questions have arisen following this debate: the right of a community to preserve their cultural beliefs and practices. Principles of justice, autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence are involved in this traditional practice. Looking at FGM’s practice from the principalism approach, it is clear that it violates beneficence principles. Moreover, it violates the laws of justice. The principle of autonomy is influenced by values that vary from one region to another. In the case of FGM, a victim is a vulnerable person, mostly between the ages of 4-10. According to the principle of autonomy, parents must decide whether to go ahead with the procedure on behalf of their children (Parrott 2014).
In western countries, FGM conjures an association of gender oppression and child abuse. This practice has been condemned and legislated. The use of the term “mutilation,” a value-laden term that showcases intentional damage, fails to reflect FGM communities’ intentions and motivations.
The practice of FGM may result in consequences among girls and women and is often understood as a form of gender-based violence. However, these practices are engrained in the culture and traditions of some communities. There should be ethically and culturally sensitive health services regarding FGM.
Working hand-in-hand with the public sector and community-based organizations will allow more sensitive and clinical guidelines concerning FGM. Medical ethics fundamentals and values, such as compassion, respect, justice and accountability, beneficence, and non-malfeasance, should be honored. Sociocultural interactions will require adequate attention. It is essential to recognize girls’ and women’s value and dignity (Gast & Patmore, 2012).
A cultural, gender, and ethically sensitive approach is argued to ensure that quality healthcare is provided. For FGM practicing societies, it is necessary to engage in morally sensitive strategies and reduce harm regarding systems of care and prevention of risks and consequences. It is also essential to consider ethnicity, sex, and gender integral to FGM’s social construction (Banks, 2012).
The status of the law
In this discussion, we will look at the UK law as a case study. In England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, the FGM Act of 2003 states that; “to excise, infibulate or otherwise mutilate any part of the girl’s labia, or clitoris constitutes offense with imprisonment of fourteen years.” However, the legislation has two puzzling features. First, it specifies that “girls include women,” thereby equating the consent capacities of adult women to those of children. Secondly, the laws contain a caution to allow genital alterations to be deemed necessary to the health of a girl or a woman. This confusing legislation portrays procedures like FGCS as essential to the health of some women while at the same time appears to prevent the practice of traditional FGM. Moreover, it is interpreted to be performed for reasons of customary or ceremonial purposes.
It is possible to argue that there could be dire consequences to a person’s mental health who is denied FGM if she lives in a community that carries on this practice. The only reason that can be grounded in law is that FGCS is medically safer than the traditional FGM since it is performed in a hospital or clinic setting. However, risks are similar to complications and occur in both practices.
According to Thompson (2016), the strength of background norms, whether religious or cultural, is a reason for respecting and tolerating it. Communities that practise this culture are equally robust organized and mostly carried out by women. In most scenarios, men are banned from participation and seldom report a desire to abandon the practice. In some communities, for example, parts of Sudan, FGM is motivated by the prizing of female chastity and girls’ subjection to be presumed sexual aesthetics as a preference for men. In other communities, for example, in Kenya, there is a belief that girls with intact genitalia will be uncontrollable and promiscuous, and cutting the genitalia is necessary to prove virginity. For other communities, the motivating factor is not entirely anti-sexual. Therefore, the temptation to generalize a specific motivation should be resisted.
Conclusion
This paper started by defining FGM and discussing whether it is an element of identity among communities that practise it or whether it is an illegal practice. A discussion of ethical theories and legislation in the UK was also addressed. The stereotypical reasons for the practice of FGM are regarded to be indefensible. One can easily argue that ensuring virginity for a girl can justify FGM’s procedure in a community that considers virginity a ticket for marriage and the only way to provide security for a girl. The laws concerning FGM are not based on objective distinctions but are heavily influenced by social and political discourses. Changes to the rules should be affected to allow genital surgeries to be chosen based on one’s preferences and values. Medical attention should be offered with regulated clinic conditions, paying more attention to complications and follow-up care.
References.
Banks, S., 2012. Ethics and values in social work. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Gast, L.E., and Patmore, A., 2012. Mastering approaches to diversity in social work. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Parrott, L., 2014. Values and ethics in social work practice. Learning Matters.
Thompson, N., 2016. Anti-discriminatory practise: Equality, diversity, and social justice. Macmillan International Higher Education.